Libya no-fly zone

it will become tribal. note when if we ever leave Baghadad what will transpire, but it has already. Afghan will follow suit as well. If Khad is popped and his sons what will the Libyan peoples put in as replacement ? they have been under a terrible dictatorship for far too long. Freedom is wonderful but then what ? I can think of Yemen as another and even the headache the royals in Syria are going through right now. Obviously change has been needed for far too long in all these backward areas. Personally the US of A needs to distant herself and isn't happening we still need to be the worlds police force

 

That echo's what was said here pretty closely:
Potential Hot Spots: The Revised Endgame In Libya
although they aren't quite so pessimistic.

 

Should it even matter? You may not agree with it, but they deserve the right to chose for themselves. Egypt has already earned that right.

 

I have to disagree,the result will be that Khadaffi wil be very popular in the ME,the image will be the West imposing its PC ideas (democracy,and such things) on the Arabs .

 

That's irrelevant :the question is :is the action good for western interests? And,IMHO,it is not .

 

Thing was that part was not heavily covered in the media before the attacks began. In fact I cannot recall any talk of attacking ground units. I too would like to see Quadaffi gone, but if we do this here are we going to Bahrain next week? Don't get me wrong I'm a confirmed 'red stater', but how far is too far?

 

No it's not irrelevant. It's quite relevant. Now your question is as well but I don't think it's a clear call in the short run. In the long run I think it is in the best interest of the west.

As for this:

Sadam didn't become popular in the ME at least to any great extent because of the US invasion and especially if there are no western troops on the ground rather the opposite may occur. Indeed Khadaffi has made himself very unpopular during his reign. The only reason I can see that some ME diplomats are reconsidering is that they don't want to face revolutions of their own especially if backed by wester fire power. The "Arab Street" is probably less unhappy about this prospect.

 

What PC ideas are those: Freedom or religion, Freedom of expression, The right to a fair trial, Health Care, Higher learning, freedom from opression.....? Ghadaffi..Qadaffi...Khadaffi, how ever he spells it this time, is a dic-tator who cares more about propagating his oligarchy than his does the Libyan people. He should have been whacked a long time ago.

 

NPR mentioned it first thing. Said it was more than a no fly zone provision and Clinton as well as others had been mentioning before hand that "no fly" meant taking down the Lybian AA network.

That's a very good question. However I don't think it's a problem. The only reason this one went was the Arab Leage asked for it. Bahrain has too many freinds in the League for that to happen.

 

I understood the No Fly Zone included airfields and the AA network, but not attacks on ground combat units like tanks and mech. infantry. Kind of like calling the Korean war as a police action. 20 years ago Quadaffi was a pain in the but to us without question, but lately not really. We have what 50-75,000 troops in Iraq, an active war in Afganistan, Japan's relief effort and we can't pay our current debt's. Another 'Operation' with no exit strategy seems unwise to me. Lord I hope they know what they are doing, because we can't sustain another multi-year operation.

 

Why would it be in the interest of the west to whack a dictator ?In a lot of cases,it was in the interest of the west to do business with dictators .
What khadaffi is doing to his people (how horrendous it may be) is no business for Obama :Obama was elected to act in the benefit of the US people,not in the benefit of the Lybian people.
And,why would it be in the interest of the west to impose by force its political ideas and thus also its political system in the ME ?
Be carefull (of course,I will be a Cassandra):the whole thing is reminding me Kennedy's inauguration speech :the arrogance of liberal America :defending democracy in South Vietnam,imposing democracy in Iraq ,instead of using some of Saddam's henchmen ,we have seen the results .It seems that Washington has learned nothing .What will be the result? After Lybia,Syria? (unless you think that there is no dictatorship in Syria).And,then Iran ?And ,Algeria ?And,Pakistan ? And,why not China ?
Maybe,Obama and his ideologues should remember the wise words from Kipling :West is West and East is East,and and they will never meet each other ;
And,this before there will a new 09/11

 

Of course they are knowing what they are doing :they are willing to have a place in the future history books:the persons who liberated the Lybian people (and they don't care about the risks for the American people)

 

Well,in the long run,we are all dead,and,for a US politician,the long run is 4 years (till the next presidential election).
I don't know,but why,why are US presidents always thinking that they have a mission :to liberate people,to help foreigners ,to protect democracy (abroad),to act as the policeman of the world,and let the US taxpayer to pay the bill?
Who said:the road to the hell is paved with good intentions ?
And who said:the business of America is to do business (vicepresident Marshall ? It certainly was a wise man )

 

In response to claims that the Muslim Brotherhood might ascend to power in many of these nations: So be it. This is a very exciting time in the Middle East, which presents a chance for many of the countries in the region to finally govern themselves. The voices of those in the Middle East, extremists included, have long been silenced and suppressed by Western-supported autocracies, fueling much discontent. With the opportunity of autonomy, the Middle Eastern people have a chance to finally take over their own affairs and implement the policy that they have long been propagating. The Muslim Brotherhood may not seem ideal to US interests, but I would argue that continuing to suppress their message is far more threatening to national security than allowing them to have a voice and attempt to put their policies into action; in a true democracy, the people will have the final choice of whether or not they remain in power.

That is why I am so vehemently against this Western intervention in Libya. It is time for the people of the ME to actually choose their own fate without of the helping (or hindering) hand of the US and Europe.

 

Looks like a huge mess right now, the impression I get is that "intervention" is hugely uncoordinated with very unclear objectives.
IMO throwing a few missiles is not likely to solve a thing except adding to the death toll and creating justification for planting a few bombs in return, even if a lucky hit were to kill Khadaffi, and from recent reports it looks like some were aimed that way, it's not a good idea.
What are we really doing ?
- Are we stating that airstrikes are not acceptable forms of counter-isnurgency? with Afghanistan and Cecenia in mind it looks very much double standards.
- Are we taking sides in a what is probably a tribal conflict ?.
- Do we just want to remove a dictator? one that up to a few monts ago at least part of the current "coalition" was welcoming with open arms because he brought oil and investments ?

I have no sympathy for Khadaffi or his likes, he is a very bad neighbour to have, but I really don't like to see this sort of confused moves where the only undisputable fact is we are killing people as some sort of modern era "gunboat diplomacy". I hope is that the decision makers know more than I do and results will prove me wrong but looking at precedents I'm not optiimistic. I think the Chinese are dancing with joy at the prospect of the "loss of face" the west is likely to suffer in Africa as a result.

 

Why is it irrelevant? If the Libyans have asked for the assistance of the international community, just why should our own interests come first? Do you prefer we sit back and watch the atrocities unfold on your news network of choice? I believe it is the right thing to to on a moral level. What else deserves to be more important than that?

 

to the list of coalition countries should be added Denmark , they have dispatched some F-16s.

 

What you forget is that as a member of the UN the US is obligated to assist. The US has all of the neat toys and gee whiz technology to do what needs to be done in short order. As it stands right now the US is going to be turning over control of the operation in the comming days or weeks.

Not everything revolves around western imperialism. The bottom line is that the people of Libya want Khadaffi gone and the UN is going to help facilitate that.

 

As an independant nation,the US has no obligations .

 

No one is ever obligated to help or do the right thing.